The Lens of Race « Columbus Underground Messageboard

Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion

The Lens of Race

[120 posts] [23 contributors]

Topic Rating:

(Total Ratings: )
Rate this topic:

Started 4 years ago by kitoba
Latest reply from greenhouse1014

Tags:

No tags yet. Add them below.

12…6 Next »

ChrisSunami
King-Lincoln District
Login to Send PM

This is a spin-off from the following thread about Brownstone:
http://www.columbusunderground.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=11186
BCOZ wrote How would our thread starter feel about a discussion where whitey said "I'm gonna go to that thar restaurant cuz the owner's white"?
QUOTE EDITED: See below
kitoba wrote The problem with a "buy white" message is that it's analogous to a "buy WalMart" commercial --there's nothing progressive about it.
drew wrote That would seem to be an awfully controversial statement.
"Buy white" is not progressive, in the sense of moving towards an aim that I would endorse as progress, in that everyone already buys white. Just like "Buy WalMart" is not progressive in that everyone already shops at WalMart. "Buy white" is a progressive message if and only if your idea of progress is a society where white economic domination of the marketplace is even more complete and unbroken.
"Buy black," however, is arguably progressive in that it aims at a society with a more racially and culturally diverse marketplace.
As Skreened's South Park clip aptly showed, the problem with taking a "color-blind" stance in a majority white or white-dominated environment is that all the default choices align with the tastes, preferences and standards of the dominant mainstream. The lone black voice (in the clip) is treated as the agitator and as the source of the problem, merely because of calling attention to a negative situation. No one in real life explicitly celebrates a "white victory" when the minorities shut up and walk away, but the result is the same.

Posted 4 years ago #
daniel
Old Town East
Login to Send PM

kitoba wrote The lone black voice (in the clip) is seen as the agitator and as the source of the problem, merely because of calling attention to a negative situation. No one in real life explicitly celebrates a "white victory" when the minorities shut up and walk away, but the result is the same.
I'm glad you saw my point in that. You have the problem that when you bring up racism to most whites, it's generally not seen as a problem or an issue these days. These are my default personal feelings as well. But I know enough to know that my perspective isn't complete and I agree with what you're saying.
re: brownstone as an example;
this is a tough one. There are big ethics questions that were brought up about the management. White or Black, it's definitely not something that makes me look favorable on the dealings and decisions. I, of course, don't know what they are, and will continue to give them the benefit of the doubt despite these allegations. If these allegations are true though, in my mind I have an immediate answer about it's failing that supersedes race.
Columbus has a comparably thriving black middle class. I want to see more. But i don't have the answers.

Posted 4 years ago #
Tigertree
771 N. High St.
Login to Send PM

I think using the phrase "buy whitey" is a little offensive.

Posted 4 years ago #
daniel
Old Town East
Login to Send PM

Tigertree wrote I think using the phrase "buy whitey" is a little offensive.
buy your conscience.
if it's convenience, race, quality, service, price, location, ethics or some other reason: everyone has a different reason.
There may be whites who go out of their way to buy black, there may be whites who go out of their way not to buy black - my guess is that those both cancel each other out and you're left with all the other things that make a good business.

Posted 4 years ago #
ChrisSunami
King-Lincoln District
Login to Send PM

skreened wrote re: brownstone as an example;
this is a tough one. There are big ethics questions that were brought up about the management.
I was never really a Brownstone patron --something I feel a bit guilty about now --so I can't really comment much on their particular situation.
But it bothered me that people were treating the comment that it was a rare black-owned business with a diverse, upper-middle-class client base as an illegitimate addition to the conversation. Whether or not this particular business deserved to live or die, it is a fact is that its disappearance leaves a specific void in the Columbus marketplace.
Now you've gone and gotten me back on topic, right after I spun off my new thread! :shock:
Tigertree wrote I think using the phrase "buy whitey" is a little offensive.
I was quoting BCOZ who I assume is white, and who seemed to be using the term for comic effect. But since it seems to be muddying the waters, I'll edit it out.

Posted 4 years ago #
drew

Login to Send PM

I think part of my problem with what you've been posting is a result of the context- the original post on the original thread was about a business that was run into the ground because of what appears to be just incredible mismanagement, and the original poster was asking for support for the business simply in the name diversity (and to otherwise 'pay no attention to the man behind the curtain').
To my mind, the mismanagement aspect is the main issue. Particularly since, as others pointed out, the owners had advantages that few ever will have, and still blew it spectacularly. Seems to me that to ignore that would amount to race-based charity. And if I might have ever had it in me to lean towards such charity in spite of the mismanagement, I resolutely wouldn't after the OP so brazenly played up race in such a coercive manner. You suggested we should allow for lenience since the original post's quote was originally directed pretty exclusively towards a black audience (which I'm not entirely sure I think matters...) but once it was reposted here, it wasn't.
Outside of the context of the Brownstone, I'm more sympathetic to your point of view. Not so much in the name of ethnic diversity exactly, but more because people from different walks of life bring different things to the table (pun intended!)
Still, though, should diversity be promoted by making racial distinctions or by making economic distinctions? I lean towards economics, because being poor sucks no matter who you are. Is that 'less progressive'?
Lastly, as to your Walmart comment- I get your point, but essentially equating white with wallyworld (or big business in general) seems to be a needlessly divisive cliche.

Posted 4 years ago #
joev
Merion Village
Login to Send PM

There are people of all races out there creating the great services and products in the marketplace. I really don't care which race the proprietor is. I just buy the best product for me. Of course, we all want to support our communities, but I think we should think of our community as more than the people who look like us.

Posted 4 years ago #
Brewmaster
Portland, OR
Login to Send PM

Exactly. I support diversity in goods and services. That's why I buy pho from Lac Viet instead of a Big Macs, Jeni's ice cream instead of Dairy Queen, and baskets of Sweet Potato Fries from Tip Top instead of Biggie Fries from Wendy's. It happens that those businesses are run by women and/or minorities, and I suppose thier diverse backgrounds reflect thier diverse products. But be clear, I'm buying the product, not the background.

Posted 4 years ago #
greenhouse1014
Columbus
Login to Send PM

I think, for the most part, the larger picture is being missed from trying to point "blame" for the closing. As the OP, this is not what I had in mind and it's not what I get from the article. Businesses close for whatever reason and, unless you're directly tied into the business, anything we can say to management issues, finances, etc. can only be assumption and hearsay. We don't know all of the facts surrounding these issues (at least I don't). What we DO know, however, is that an area mostly populated by black-owned businesses has not seen anything even resembling development. When one of those businesses DID try to do something to make the area more attractive, increase traffic to the area, etc., the city shut it down. (say what you will about permits, etc. All I know is that the city put up a NO EXIT sign where the street would have closed. Am I the only one who saw it?) As someone said earlier in the thread, diversity (unfortunately) has to be created and takes a lot more effort to succeed, for a variety of reasons. These might incude white people being afraid to be in a place with a lot of black people (seen it) or even the conscious decision to avoid a place because its black-owned (seen it). The city, who touts their diversity, should have taken a more active part in developing the one place in all of downtown where the majority of busineses were minority owned. Oh, and for whatever it matters, and since we're talking about race now, I'm white. I believe in Columbus' downtown and I would like to see it developed as a place people actually go, not just to work, but after work and on the weekends. The saddest thing I ever see is downtown totally dead after 5 and on the weekends.
Oh, and if you think Columbus is as diverse as we might want to think, ask 20 middle-to-low middle-class black people and see what they think.
Regardless, the closing of Brownstone left a HUGE vacuum in the downtown area.

Posted 4 years ago #
ChrisSunami
King-Lincoln District
Login to Send PM

Drew wrote
Still, though, should diversity be promoted by making racial distinctions or by making economic distinctions? I lean towards economics, because being poor sucks no matter who you are. Is that 'less progressive'?
Does it have to be one or the other? I support both, personally.
I think it is true that we are moving towards a scenario where the interests and aims of the black-middle class are divorced (or at least are perceived as divorced) from those of the black under-class, much as is already true for the white middle class and white under-class. But as of today, it's still true that even a solidly middle-class black person such as myself still will almost certainly have close friends and relatives in poverty --a fact that makes the interests of black America as a whole line up with the interests of the poor in a way that the interests of white America as a whole do not.
(And yes, I'm aware that many white people also have friends or relatives who are poor...)
You have the problem that when you bring up racism to most whites, it's generally not seen as a problem or an issue these days.
This is a crucial question, since from my point of view, things have gotten worse recently, rather than better. It seems to me that racial prejudice (and actually, just prejudice in general, whether racial, religious or sexual) have a certain "outlaw cred" these days. Being just a little bit prejudiced seems to make people cooler in the eyes of many --they're considered independent thinkers, brave warriors against the tyranny of political correctness.
The main thing these days that is different is just that people are tired of talking about the problems --not that the problems have actually gone away.
drew wrote You suggested we should allow for lenience since the original post's quote was originally directed pretty exclusively towards a black audience
I think you misread me. I wasn't arguing for lenience, since I didn't think the original post needed lenience. I was pointing out that the original article was asking black people to support black-owned businesses, with the argument that it is in our own best economic interests; rather than what many here (perhaps not you) seemed to read it as: an attempt to use liberal guilt to coerce white people into supporting those same businesses regardless of quality.
I'm not necessarily defending that argument (the first one). Like greenhouse, I believe that a more diverse environment is an asset to everyone, not just to blacks. But I do think it's important to respond to the argument or the original article as it was originally intended, rather than in a misleading context.

Posted 4 years ago #
daniel
Old Town East
Login to Send PM

greenhouse1014 wrote The city, who touts their diversity, should have taken a more active part in developing the one place in all of downtown where the majority of busineses were minority owned.
From my experience with city council et all, thriving diversity could not be higher on their list. Just because that doesn't manifest in a particular way that you think it should, doesn't mean it's not a dearly held and acted upon value.

Posted 4 years ago #
Manatee
The eternal present
Login to Send PM

Hey, is there a business association for black-owned businesses? That might be something to start up or get involved in if this issue is something you're passionate about.
Then you could work with like-minded folks to build better and stronger businesses. We could use those around here, no matter what the color :).
And advertising: I had never even known that the Brownstone existed before this thread.

Posted 4 years ago #
drew

Login to Send PM

greenhouse1014 wrote I think, for the most part, the larger picture is being missed from trying to point "blame" for the closing. As the OP, this is not what I had in mind and it's not what I get from the article.
OK...
greenhouse1014 wrote When one of those businesses DID try to do something to make the area more attractive, increase traffic to the area, etc., the city shut it down.
Oh, I see! No blame there!
In other words, don't blame the owners (because we don't know for sure that they were completely incapable of running a business) blame the city. :roll:

Posted 4 years ago #
greenhouse1014
Columbus
Login to Send PM

Can we just drop the "blame" word. I'm not blaming the closing on the patio, I'm pointing out the development issue.
And Dan, it's action that matters. Not the fact that its on the agenda or high on the list.
I'm noty sure how anyone would be able to honestly attest to the management or business skills unless they have been employed by the place and it seems the attitude being shown is that of disgruntled employee. I'm not saying that's what's happening here. I'm just saying that's how it seems. Otherwise, pointing to any of these issues is only assumption. I prefer to work in what I know, not what I assume.

Posted 4 years ago #
drew

Login to Send PM

kitoba wrote
Drew wrote
Still, though, should diversity be promoted by making racial distinctions or by making economic distinctions? I lean towards economics, because being poor sucks no matter who you are. Is that 'less progressive'?
Does it have to be one or the other? I support both, personally.
I think there are too many unintended consequences to race-based preferences:
1) You can't provide charity based upon race without inherently suggesting that certain races are intrinsically less capable of succeeding without it. One friend of mine who is in a fairly high position within a large organization once suggested that she wasn't sure if she had achieved her position because of her ability or because the business wanted a black in a high profile position. It genuinely seemed to bother her.
2) It can be woefully unjust. I'm thinking of college, where minority-only scholarships would usually go to wealthy asian international students. They were generally more than worthy of acknowledgment for their considerable achievements, but... financial aid? Seems to invert the original intent.
3) The obvious one- the poor white kid without connections, money, or introduction to mainstream social norms. He/she, endowed with the same right to vote as anyone else, will be utterly uninterested in (and perhaps openly hostile towards) any future movements towards social justice. After all, in their eyes, important aspects of life have already been divided into 'us' and 'them', and 'they' have been getting things that 'we' can't!
Economic preferences are inherently fair- whichever race is represented most among the lower income groups benefits most -and they do a great job of avoiding the above problems.
kitoba wrote
You have the problem that when you bring up racism to most whites, it's generally not seen as a problem or an issue these days.
This is a crucial question, since from my point of view, things have gotten worse recently, rather than better. It seems to me that racial prejudice (and actually, just prejudice in general, whether racial, religious or sexual) have a certain "outlaw cred" these days. Being just a little bit prejudiced seems to make people cooler in the eyes of many --they're considered independent thinkers, brave warriors against the tyranny of political correctness.
The main thing these days that is different is just that people are tired of talking about the problems --not that the problems have actually gone away.
Has anyone here said anything in either thread that you'd characterize as racist? I've only seen a few opinions that expressed strict colorblindness.
I'd hope that racism hasn't become 'cool' lately, but if has, I'd take it as a warning towards the purveyors of PC excess. Every college educated person has run into at least one prof (if not the entire college) who went to great lengths to enforce speech codes and 'correct' modes of thought. What fully alive adolescent wouldn't respond to some of the more overzealous examples of PC with predictable backlash?
-----
Something you've avoided addressing from my previous post is the context of the original thread. Should the owners of any business, in spite of their apparent inability to grasp even the fundamentals of how to run a business, be supported simply because of race? Is competency irrelevant when race is involved?

Posted 4 years ago #
ChrisSunami
King-Lincoln District
Login to Send PM

1) You can't provide charity based upon race without inherently suggesting that certain races are intrinsically less capable of succeeding without it.
I think the term "race-based charity" automatically distorts the conversation. The plain and simple fact is this: Diversity does not create itself. Every diverse environment I've been privileged to be a part of has been consciously created and maintained, often with considerable effort and a certain amount of sacrifice. If a school chooses to dedicate a slot to a black student because they have no black students, or to an Asian student because they have no Asian students, it's not necessarily either a slap in the face to all white people or a patronizing handout to someone who couldn't succeed own his or her own. It's a conscious and concrete step towards diversifying an environment by an organization that has chosen to view diversity as something valuable.
The obvious one- the poor white kid without connections, money, or introduction to mainstream social norms. He/she, endowed with the same right to vote as anyone else, will be utterly uninterested in (and perhaps openly hostile towards) any future movements towards social justice. After all, in their eyes, important aspects of life have already been divided into 'us' and 'them', and 'they' have been getting things that 'we' can't!
Yes, divide-and-conquer is the standard method of keeping people of different races from uniting around common issues of economic exploitation. But isn't a little disingenuous to blame that situation on affirmative action?
Has anyone here said anything in either thread that you'd characterize as racist?
I never said that anything posted here was racist --although I never said the opposite either. What I did say was that racism is still a problem in America, even though conversations about that problem are no longer welcome in mainstream discourse.
I'd hope that racism hasn't become 'cool' lately, but if has, I'd take it as a warning towards the purveyors of PC excess.
I'd take it as a warning towards minorities of all descriptions.
Something you've avoided addressing from my previous post is the context of the original thread. Should the owners of any business, in spite of their apparent inability to grasp even the fundamentals of how to run a business, be supported simply because of race? Is competency irrelevant when race is involved?
I thought I had adequately expressed my opinion that no one was making that argument in the first place.

Posted 4 years ago #
greenhouse1014
Columbus
Login to Send PM

Drew-
Your number One is the bigotry of low expectations.
Something you've avoided addressing from my previous post is the context of the original thread. Should the owners of any business, in spite of their apparent inability to grasp even the fundamentals of how to run a business, be supported simply because of race? Is competency irrelevant when race is involved?
Well, let me just say that, no matter how business savvy you may or may not be, it matters a whole lot less when the deck is stacked against you and there appears to be no change in sight.
Let's take ourselves away from the base issue of one restaurant and take a look at the area for a minute. Look at Main Street now. Not the most hospitable and, as darkness approaches, fewer and fewer people are willing to find themselves on the street. The bus station is right around the corner and the neighborhood slips as a whole the further east you go. Now, imagine that the city actually took an interest in developing this very important area. Lighting is better. There's not as many empty storefronts and the area is more pedestrain friendly. How could a business not prosper? People don't like to deal with Main Street and its one of downtown's most traveled streets. People whiz by and there's no reasn for them to even turn their head and see that there's actually business there.
This city administration has done little more than pay lip service to "diverse development". Not only in the downtown area, but also in the neighborhoods. Sure, they turn around some token spots on Main and Livingston, but look deeper and you see empty buildings that have been standing that way for years. You see pockets in which crime has a home. You see prostitutes walking the streets while children walk home from school. It's nice to say that you're for developing the urban areas, but, again, actions speak louder than words and when it comes right down to it, the city is merely whispering.

Posted 4 years ago #
gramarye
In Exile
Login to Send PM

Let's take ourselves away from the base issue of one restaurant and take a look at the area for a minute. Look at Main Street now. Not the most hospitable and, as darkness approaches, fewer and fewer people are willing to find themselves on the street. The bus station is right around the corner and the neighborhood slips as a whole the further east you go. Now, imagine that the city actually took an interest in developing this very important area. Lighting is better. There's not as many empty storefronts and the area is more pedestrain friendly. How could a business not prosper?
Bluntly, for the very reason Drew said: a business might not prosper due to being a poorly run business.
That's not to say that we shouldn't fix roads and streetlights and target police coverage on at-risk areas where a little extra enforcement might provide breathing space for a genuine turnaround. Far from it. Those are clearly public responsibilities. However, that's ancillary to the point Drew was making, and on which I agree with him. There is no independent moral value to supporting a minority-owned business. I don't eat at Jeni's because she's a woman and I wouldn't refuse to eat there because she's not a minority. I eat there because she makes really good ice cream.
For a starker example, pick something where the stakes are far higher than "where will I eat lunch today?" Would you hire a minority lawyer who was perhaps a hair less qualified just because he was a minority? What about an investment banker, or the manager of a company you actually owned (rather than one you're merely considering giving your patronage)? Those are the real issues in play here, not a lack of urban revitalization programs. One can completely support the latter without at all supporting racial preferences in law or as some kind of civic or moral obligation.

Posted 4 years ago #
drew

Login to Send PM

greenhouse1014 wrote Your number One is the bigotry of low expectations.
I don't know what you mean by that.
greenhouse1014 wrote Well, let me just say that, no matter how business savvy you may or may not be, it matters a whole lot less when the deck is stacked against you and there appears to be no change in sight.
Are you saying that the deck was stacked against them because of the location? If so... who chose the location? The owners, I'd assume.
Perhaps... just perhaps... that wasn't a very smart business decision. What's that real estate mantra... location, location, location. Works for commercial real estate as well.
And do you think that it's the city's obligation to develop the whole area just because a new business moved into it? Really???
Listen man, in all seriousness- I have nothing against the Brownstone. Never have, really truly honestly. But I've gotta tell ya- you're not doing a very good job of generating sympathy for them. There are more than a few small business owners on these forums, myself included. I don't think any of us have had the benefit of a quarter-million-dollar loan from the city. And yet somehow, we're still around. I sympathize with the idea that a place like the Brownstone is an asset to the city, and that people should realize that. But you're asking us to look past a whole lotta stuff that the management apparently did wrong. And your only response is, 'We don't know the whole story, blah blah blah.'
My recommendation- get the full story, and then come back. I really suspect that if you find out how everything really went down, you won't be quite so hard-charging and enthusiastic about it all.

Posted 4 years ago #
Coremodels
Really close to Explorer's Club.
Login to Send PM

It occurs to me that the best way to endorse a "Buy Black" sentiment, is make sure black business owners, professionals, whatever are actually providing a superior product or price or whatever other buying conditions exist.
Considering I don't actually believe anyone buys a product based on race, that seems to be the reality of this. Brownstone isn't closed because people opted for the inferior, white alternatives in the neighborhood...they closed because they mismanaged their business.
Carlos is killing at El Arepazo because he's running a smart business with a great product at an affordable price...not because he's Latino. He's not relying on a "Buy Latin" initiative to fill his restaurant and properly fill his cash register.
Until I see any evidence that people are "shopping race" and not "shopping price" or "shopping quality", this seems like a rather ridiculous sentiment to me.
There's already huge initiatives in place to give a boost to minority owned businesses in Columbus and Ohio and the U.S. as a whole. The Ohio Department of Development commissioned and funded 8 different programs, including the COMBA, for that purpose.
The minute you can tell me you'd pick a less qualified or talented surgeon to give you a vasectomy based on race, I'll start believing your commitment to this.

Posted 4 years ago #